Missouri Speaker of the House Tim Jones (R—Eureka) and his constituents overturned 10 of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon's vetoes during a special session held in the Jefferson City last week.

Ten.

For the record, that is the most ever by a Missouri legislative body. The second most? Three, of then-Governor Bob Holden back in 2003.

Jones, the 42-year-old father of two and licensed attorney has already been in the Missouri state legislature coming on seven years. He was unanimously elected House Majority Leader, and currently has over a year left in his tenure as unanimously-elected Speaker of the Missouri State House of Representatives.

As part of a local interview and press circuit, Jones stopped by the MMI office Thursday morning (Sept. 19). After visits in Moberly, Jones traveled north along Highway 63 to Macon, and from there, went east, to Hannibal, to speak.

The following is the result of the MMI's sitdown interview with Jones (following the initial greetings, of course):

MMI: You've probably been getting a lot of questions about veto session lately, so we'll get that out of the way first.

Tim Jones: (smiles) The interest is being lost every day, but some people are still talking about it.

MMI: Did anything surprise you coming out of veto session?

TJ: Actually, the biggest surprise for me was how many times we actually over-rode the Governor. I thought we would override the Governor on three to five bills, which would break a record; but I didn't think we'd shatter the record.

Three was the record. Bob Holden was overridden three times back in 2003. That was the record. That was the single season record, as we'll call it. The overall record, Bob Holden also had, which was six times during a governorship.

Governor Nixon has now been overridden 12 times, total — two terms — and 10 times in one session. That actually was a surprise to me.

One out of the major bills that we brought up did not make it. There were a couple of other, smaller bills that didn't get overridden, but we over-rode the governor probably — I guess if you do the math — 90 percent of the bills we brought up. That is remarkable, because it never has happened before. It doesn't happen. Year-in, year-out, there's typically not even a chance to override a governor.

I now have 11 overrides to my name. Senator (Tom) Dempsey (Senate Majority Caucus Whip) and I actually get to sign the bills into law, now. As Majority Leader, I overrode the governor on congressional redistricting maps. Last year, I was elected Speaker early, because Speaker (Steven) Tilley resigned early. I overrode the governor on the religious freedom bill, and then I overrode the governor 10 times on these bills.

Page 2 of 6 - I've signed 11 bills into law. That may be a record for a speaker.

It's all about the caucus. These bills were not my bills. I was interested in some of these bills — some of them were priorities to me — but I didn't sponsor any of these bills. I was a co-sponsor. They were important to my caucus, and so the fact that I was able to help my caucus cross off the to-do list 10 major items — in our minds, those bills were all important bills — that was the story, to me.

MMI: I'll get back to the veto session in a second, but you brought up something I think is worth touching on. Randolph County was actually split into four different districts via redistricting. Because of that, we don't have an actual representative from our county. We have representatives from the surrounding counties. What are your thoughts on that?

TJ: Very few people who are actually serving in office, or that have served, or that are thinking about serving, are very happy with the state district map. I should point out that the state legislature had nothing to do with the drawing of those lines, and many believe we should have more of a role.

Those maps were drawn by judges. Drawing political maps every 10 years is something that they're just not accustomed to doing.

We know the districts — the communities of interest, as we call them. Randolph County is a community of interest. I've been up here many times. I know a lot of your community leaders and businesspeople and people in the media up here, and you are a unique community, just like many of the other unique communities across the state.

My communities got divided up on the St. Louis side. Southeast Missouri. Northeast Missouri. Southwest Missouri. There's a couple of really, really bad examples of where the same thing happened. We have a couple of large cities in our state that got divided into seven or eight different districts, which means, who do they go to, and who is their representative? I've been an advocate and a supporter of changing the way that we do redistricting. If we can pursue legislation on that in my final year, I'll be very happy to support it, because I think communities of interest need to be preserved, along with all of the other demographics and legal requirements of drawing a fair and equitable map. I think community of interest is very important to that.

MMI: What would your suggestion on that sort of situation be?

TJ: I think you need to have people involved that actually are involved in the day-to-day political realities of representing a region of the state. I think you should have Democrats and Republicans who are familiar with district lines and demographics and populations, because we are the ones who work on this every day — not people who are randomly plucked from the populace once every 10 years, not judges.

Page 3 of 6 - I think you should look to have a bipartisan panel of active legislators and staff who are engaged in that. I would also incorporate some of the community leaders, as well.

Redistricting is a political process. It has nothing to do really with public policy, except for the districts you create should represent the public policy of those regions.

MMI: Back to veto session. The number of vetoes up for override this year was also close to a record, wasn't it?

TJ: Second highest. I had to do this research. [In] 1961, Governor John Dalton vetoed 35 bills. Twenty-nine is a close second or third. I thought Governor Ashcroft might have vetoed a large number too, but the number I was told was 35 by John Dalton.

This also was historic, yes. It showed — Jay Nixon has been in office for five years. He's had nowhere near 29 vetoes in his four previous sessions. What does that show me? It shows me that Jay Nixon is governing in a very different way than he did in his first term.

MMI: Does that say more to you about the work of the legislative body or the Governor?

TJ: It says, to me, everything about the Governor, because the legislature has not changed very much in its overall demographic. It's become a little more Republican every year, but it's been a Republican governing majority the entire time of Jay Nixon's tenure. It shows, to me, that the Governor has unfortunately decided to work less with the legislature than more.

The body makeup of the legislature is not going to change during Governor Nixon's remaining three years, so I think it's unfortunate for Missourians that the governor has chosen to work less with the legislature than to work more with the legislature. I would encourage him, after this veto session, to read those strong messages sent to him, and to reverse course.

I would also point out: the majority of the bills that were overridden could not have been overridden without Democratic support, as well. Out of the 10, there were maybe two or three that were entirely done by our 109, which is the number you need. On a couple of our bills — on many of those bills — we lost a few votes. We picked it up with Democratic support. They were bipartisan. I think that proves my point. Not only has Jay Nixon decided not to work with the Republicans — he doesn't work very closely with his Democratic house members, either.

MMI: House Bill 253 — where do you think it failed in grasping and holding on to support? It passed, Governor vetoed, was unable to get the override.

TJ: I knew this was an uphill battle from the beginning, because even though we had a strong bi-partisan governing majority that supported the bill during session, as I mentioned, before we realized we were going to override the Governor 10 times, we had in our minds that veto overrides are always extremely difficult. They rarely happen. They're rarely even attempted.

Page 4 of 6 - This year was an anomaly year, where the governor really didn't work with the legislature, and most of the bills that were brought up, it took a little bit of time and patience, but very little arm-twisting was done on any of those 10 overrides, because people just knew it was the right thing to do, and the governor had made a wrong choice in the veto.

House Bill 253 was different. The Governor staged a well-orchestrated campaign this summer, flying around the state in the taxpayer-funded airplane that I always like to crack on, wasting a lot of taxpayer-funded jet fuel, and he co-opted the public school groups in this state by withholding their money from them on July 1, and then threatening that he would not release that money because he felt the tax cut was bad for Missouri.

I think, and 93 of my colleagues still think, that tax relief is important for all Missourians — that, that is the way to move Missouri's families, farmers and small businesses forward, towards prosperity.

We haven't done tax reform in our state in nearly a century. If the governor did not like this plan, I challenged him to come up with an alternative jobs plan. He has yet to do so. He campaigned all summer against this bill, and against the second amendment bill, which did pass the House, but got stuck in the Senate.

The House passed every major priority out of veto session except for, in my opinion, the tax cut bill. We still had 94 votes on that. That was the hardest vote that people probably ever take. For those who voted against it, I have no ill will. My goal, now, next year, is to go back to the drawing table, make the bill better, take out the problems that got inserted into it, and that got discovered — all of which, I think, were red herrings, to and extend, and could have been easily addressed, and the sky would not have fallen if we had overridden the veto; but, because of the Governor, in my opinion, using public funds to coerce the school groups to oppose the bill, creating a financial crisis in our state budget where there isn't one, because he withheld a surplus that we had – a $400 million surplus – and using some of the red herrings in the bill, some people just simply did not feel comfortable, based upon the pressure they received from their districts, to vote for the bill.

Ninety-four people, myself included, under the same intense amount of pressure — it didn't just exist in 15 districts, and not in others. It existed in all of the districts. Ninety-four people still felt strongly that this was the right vote to take.

I believe that if we can address some of the issues that were raised, I can regain 100 votes or more on this same exact topic next session, so my goal is to work with those who had problems with it. I would love to bring on Democratic support, as well, because I believe tax relief for all Missourians will help move Missouri forward, just like they're doing in other states that have adopted similar plans.

Page 5 of 6 - Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa, Arkansas are all doing similar plans. They have not sacrificed education funding. In fact, Oklahoma has a record budget revenue influx, which means you can put more money into education.

My goal is to provide tax relief and put more money into education. And I think it's possible, because if you incentivize people to spend more money in your state by offering them tax relief, you can reach that goal. I really think it's possible to do both.

MMI: You were recently presented the Crystal Wagon Award for your work on behalf of children. Tell me about that.

TJ: (smiles) You're the first media person to ask me about that, so I appreciate that. The award was presented to me by Cardinal Glennon Children's Hospital, in St. Louis. I think it's noteworthy to point out that a former Missouri senator and one of mid-Missouri's own, Kit Bond, was one of the former recipients of that award, along with some very notable people. Leaders. Major leaders in state government and in public policy, both on the community side and the business side. I'm really — I looked at the list of people who had received that before me. I'm really humbled and honored, because I didn't realize I would be in that kind of company. That was quite an honor.

This year, we made it a priority to work on several key issues important for children's advocacy. There were three significant bills that passed: one was related to the poison control center; one was related to giving children more of a voice in some of the worst criminal prosecutions relating to sexual predators; and one was a bill to help fix our ailing school districts in the urban, and even in the rural, areas, which was sponsored by a Democratic colleague of mine, Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, from the city of St. Louis.

There are not a lot of large, heavily-funded lobbying groups that work for children. These are largely not-for-profits, public servants, and child advocacy groups. I was really proud to stand with them this year, and it's going to be one of the things I'll always remember: getting to help kids in one of my two years as Speaker.

I have two children of my own. They are the future. If I can do anything that can help kids who are less disadvantaged or have been put in a really horrible situation, I'll do that.

The Crystal Wagon Award is a really noteworthy achievement that is given out by Cardinal Glennon. They're having a dinner [tonight]. It is not a fundraising event. It is simply a 'thank you,' and I get to stand side-by-side with former representative Chris Carter, whose uncle was an alderman in the city of St. Louis. He (Chris' uncle), unfortunately, was killed last year in a terrible car accident. Chris left the legislature and took his uncle's place as an alderman. Chris was one of the members of the black caucus in the city of St. Louis that I worked with hard on children's issues, and advocacy issues, so I know it's going to be a bittersweet night for Chris, but his uncle is being honored posthumously, and it will be an honor to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with my good friend and receive that award. That's going to be one of those awards that has nothing to do with politics, and has all to do with good public policy for kids.

Page 6 of 6 - MMI: I've heard that — and correct me if I'm wrong here — you have openly stated your intent to run for Attorney General at some point. Is that true, or not?

TJ: I get asked this question a lot, because people know that I'm term limited out at the end of next year.

I have one more year to serve as Speaker. My first and primary goal is to end up with a caucus that is satisfied that I served them well as Speaker. So, the way I do that is work as hard as I can with my caucus next year to focus with them on issues that will help move Missouri forward — that will help benefit Missouri's families, farmers, and small businesses. If I succeed in that goal, and if the people of the state of Missouri want to help support me in continuing to lead the state — which, I believe that has been my responsibility; I believe I was chosen as majority leader by my entire caucus, and then I was chosen by the entire House — I was unanimously elected speaker twice, because I took over early...to lead the Missouri House in a statewide role, across the entire state: not just serve one district, not just serve one region, not just serve one constituency — but all of Missouri. If I succeed in doing that in a positive way, and continue to pass pro-jobs, pro-growth, pro-economic development legislation while supporting our education system; and if I earn the support of people across Missouri, and they would like to support me in moving forward, I will be happy to consider a statewide office.

I'm a former prosecuting attorney. I have served the people of the state of Missouri in protecting them against federal overreach and encroachment, and standing up for state's rights, being on the forefront of pushing back against federal policies like Obamacare. I led the charge on the Department of Revenue scandal this year, and I personally was the one who continued that fight into the summer that got Jay Nixon to reverse his stance. So, a statewide office would be an honor to serve in, but right now, I'm focussed on finishing up as a good speaker.

(Assistant knocks on door, signaling a need to move on to the Speaker's next visit.)

MMI: One last question before you have to go. CNN, FOXNews, or MSNBC: What do you watch for your news?

TJ: (laughs) I watch all three, because you need to know what your friends are saying, and also your enemies. You need to always be doing opposition research, so you know what I do? During the week, I watch both FOX and MSNBC, and on the weekends, I am a political, and a government, and a public policy junky. I will watch all of the Sunday shows from dawn until mid-day. I'll watch Meet the Press. I'll watch George Stephanopoulos, so ABC This Week. I'll watch FOXNews Sunday. I'll watch Candy Crowley on State of the Union. I think Candy Crowley's show is one of the best. I love watching that, and Chris Wallace. I think Chris Wallace and Candy Crowley are two of the best on Sunday morning. I'll watch the PBS stations. I used to love watching The McLaughlin Group growing up, and I'll watch that every once in a while. So, I watch all three.